Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com

Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/)
-   Legal and Activism (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/)
-   -   From my cold, dead hands... (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/my-cold-dead-hands-84624/)

molonlabexx 02-19-2013 09:36 PM

From my cold, dead hands...
 
Are you guys worried about a gun ban? What magnitude do you think this will have on Americans? Wake people up.

Here is what I think

You think criminals are going to register? The black market/ cartel alone sells thousands of scratched serial firearms. Gun control DOES NOT WORK. FBI uniformed crime stats have PROVEN that a city/parish with more guns=less crime. Gun control is like taking cars away from responsible citizens to fight drunk driving. Every dictator has taken the guns and used children as propaganda. They compare the tens of thousands of AR-15 owners to criminals and mass murderers. I know several people that own AR-15 that are locked up in their safes. Never committed a crime and never will. The right to defend yourself and your family is a God given right, not man. Nick Meli, a man in his mid 20's STOPPED the mass shooting in the Oregon shopping mall with his LEGAL concealed weapon. Criminals will always have guns. Ban them? They will use other means. The AR-15 is not a military style assault weapon. The M4A1 assault rifle is the standard issue weapon for the U.S. Armed forces. It is a select fire weapon. This means it can go into single, burst fire or fully automatic modes. These weapons, along with all full auto weapons made after the 80's are illegal. The AR-15 only has a semi-automatic mode. The conversion kit can be purchased but requires extreme background checks etc etc. Not to mention there is a HUGE tax on these conversion kits. An AR-15 can fire 45-60 rounds in 1 minute. A M4A1 fully auto can fire 950 rounds in 1 minute. I agree that full auto weapons like this should be banned, there is no need for them. As for banning "high-capacity" magazines, you got to be kidding me. Joe Biden said "if it buys us 2-3 minutes of time, [we need to consider banning them]". It takes 6-8 seconds to eject a round, drop the mag from the well, grab a mag from a LBE rig and place another magazine in the well. 6-8 seconds will make no difference in a shooting. These are armchair spectators who have never seen combat experience. Biden was using all the wrong terms in the same interview. He was calling magazines "clips" and bullets "shells". I don't want people that know nothing about firearms, taking them. There was a story in New York a few weeks ago where a man was mugged by 7-8 men. He would have not had enough shots to stop the criminals. The AR-15 accounts for less than 1% (.63) of murders/shootings. Why do we need AR-15's? Well why do we need tanks for peaceful protests in New York (occupy wall street). The solution is mental healthcare funding. People will always want to do harm. Why does the media criminalize responsible gun owners who have their guns legally? The British tried to ban/take our weapons (more so the materials to make bullets and the firearms themselves) and it did not work out well for them. AR-15 type rifles have been around for a while, why weren't there as many mass shootings back then? Proving that mental healthcare needs to be addressed.

Holmes375 02-20-2013 03:24 AM

Whom would you have make the determination of who is mentally unstable enough to be denied their 2A rights? And once deemed unstable, is one always unstable or might one become mentally acceptable in the future? Who makes that determination?

Are all veterans with PTSD mentally unstable or are their varying degrees of the condition where some should be denied firearm possession while others not have restrictions imposed. And how do vets so restricted gain their rights down the road upon recuperation?

While there are certainly a goodly number of clear cut cases of mentally unstable people whom should not have access to firearms there is also a multitude of slippery slope cases that I'd not trust to the likes of mental health boards who may well be politically driven, government commissions who think they can administrate that which they'll never understand or a VA which can't find it arse with either hand.

There is and always will be inherent hazard in a free society. The best solution, in my opinion, is to take a proactive preventative stance by arming oneself or providing armed facility protection that will confront madness upon presentation and kill it immediately.

deadsp0t 02-20-2013 03:37 AM

I don't wanna have any checks other then criminal/background, in the US we are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. Meaning as citizens we are due the benefit of the doubt.
The ppl making the decision on who has the mental health to posses guns are just as susceptible to corruption and mental health issues as anyone else..

molonlabexx 02-20-2013 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deadsp0t (Post 1145237)
I don't wanna have any checks other then criminal/background, in the US we are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. Meaning as citizens we are due the benefit of the doubt.
The ppl making the decision on who has the mental health to posses guns are just as susceptible to corruption and mental health issues as anyone else..

I agree with you. The second amendment shall not be infringed.

JonM 02-20-2013 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holmes375 (Post 1145213)
Whom would you have make the determination of who is mentally unstable enough to be denied their 2A rights? And once deemed unstable, is one always unstable or might one become mentally acceptable in the future? Who makes that determination?

Are all veterans with PTSD mentally unstable or are their varying degrees of the condition where some should be denied firearm possession while others not have restrictions imposed. And how do vets so restricted gain their rights down the road upon recuperation?

While there are certainly a goodly number of clear cut cases of mentally unstable people whom should not have access to firearms there is also a multitude of slippery slope cases that I'd not trust to the likes of mental health boards who may well be politically driven, government commissions who think they can administrate that which they'll never understand or a VA which can't find it arse with either hand.

There is and always will be inherent hazard in a free society. The best solution, in my opinion, is to take a proactive preventative stance by arming oneself or providing armed facility protection that will confront madness upon presentation and kill it immediately.

If you have been prescribed psychotropic medication and are under a doctors care... i would say no.

Reason being is that those medications arent administered in a controlled way and have a huge record of actually aggravating psychotic issues including depression paranoia and manic behaviour.

Psychtropics are often over prescribed and when given to people that really dont have the imbalances they treat it can cause issues with agression and depression and often even suicide


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:37 PM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.